AAPL Landmark - Right To Treatment Flashcards
Do hospitalized insanity acquittees have a right to treatment?
Yes.
Rouse v. Cameron (1966). Judge Bazelon declared that because the purpose of involuntary hospitalization is treatment, not punishment, the hospital has a duty to furnish adequate treatment, and the patient has a legal right to receive that treatment. He alluded to a right to treatment under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.
Are individuals civilly committed for mental illness or mental retardation entitled, by the U.S. Constitution, to minimally adequate standards for psychiatric treatment?
Yes.
Wyatt v. Stickney - the District Court in Alabama ruled that confining an individual for therapeutic purposes while not providing adequate treatment violated substantive due process under the 14th Amendment.
It required a humane environment, qualified staff ratios, and individualized treatment plans.
Does the Fourteenth Amendment right to liberty include freedom from bodily restraint, safe conditions, and minimally adequate skills to reduce the need for restraint for ID individuals who are civilly committed?
Yes.
Youngberg v. Romeo - Pennsylvania; The USSC ruled that institutionalized persons are dependent on the state and therefore have a significant liberty interest that implicates due process protections, including his right to treatment (habilitation) which herein was seen through the liberty lens, that is, diminished need for physical restrain. However, they determined that “professional judgment” was the standard to judge whether it was a deviation from standard of care.
